§ Mr. CLYNESasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the view of his Department as to what constitutes misconduct sufficient to disqualify a workman in an insured trade from receiving State unemployment benefit; and whether he is aware that men are disqualified for not submitting to continue at work longer than the normal working hours or for alleged bad timekeeping when a man's total working time in the week has exceeded the fixed workshop hours?
Mr. ROBERTSONThe decision whether a workman is disqualified for receipt of unemployment benefit on the ground that he has lost employment through misconduct rests, in the first instance, with the insurance officer to whom the workman's claim is referred. The workman claiming direct from a local office has a right of appeal to a Court of Referees, and there 959W may, in certain circumstances, be a further reference to the Umpire. Each case must be decided on its merits, and the Board of Trade are unable to express any general opinion as to the meaning of the term misconduct. Any question as to the meaning of this term in connection with refunds to an association under Section 105 of the Act will be settled between the Board of Trade and the association, and failing agreement by the Umpire. I have not had such cases as those mentioned in the second part of the question brought to my notice.
§ Mr. CLYNESalso asked whether it is permissible for a society to deduct from the State unemployment benefit any arrears which an insured workman may owe when he has cause to claim benefit, or whether such arrears can be claimed before any benefit is administered?
Mr. ROBERTSONAs was stated in reply to the hon. Member for Cork County (West) on the 3rd February, there is nothing in the terms of arrangements made with associations under Section 105 of the National Insurance Act, 1911, to diminish any right which an association may have under its own rules to deduct arrears of contributions from benefit paid to any member, provided, of course, that the association makes no claim to a refund out of the Unemployment Fund in respect of any sum so deducted. I may, however, point out that the right of every workman to obtain benefits from Part II. of the Act in full, without deduction, is effectively guaranteed by the fact that he can, if he chooses, claim unemployment benefit direct from a local office of the Unemployment Fund, instead of through an association.
§ Mr. CLYNESfurther asked why workmen for whom no association has arranged to administer unemployment benefit, under Part II. of the National Insurance Act, can have disqualification cases speedily dealt with by the panel of Referees which contains workmen's representatives; why trade unionists, whose associations have arranged to administer the benefit, have to refer their disqualification cases to the Umpire; and whether equality in reference to appeals is assured by the terms of the Act and men referred to the same Court of Appeal in all cases where Labour Exchange officials declare that men are disqualified from benefit?
Mr. ROBERTSONThe arrangements for the settlement of disputed claims with960W regard to unemployment benefit claimed direct are determined by Section 88 of the Act, while the mode of settling disputes between the Board of Trade and associations as to claims for refunds is determined by Section 105. As my hon. Friend is aware, the two matters are on an entirely different footing, and I should doubt if associations would generally be willing to have these latter class of cases determined by Courts of Referees. The Board of Trade have recently submitted to the associations with which arrangements have been made proposals for expediting the discussion of individual cases between the Board of Trade and the association, and the replies received so far are generally favourable. I am sending a copy of this scheme to my hon. Friend.